Page 3 of 82 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 28 53 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 1634

Thread: Suggestions for new content for RR/RC?

  1. #41
    Suspended by Request
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    595

    Default Re: Suggestions for new content for RR/RC?

    Quote Originally Posted by Pengo View Post
    Why keep them for the slave faction? The rebel's are easy enough, keeping peasants for the sake of history will just make them more easy.
    I agree. With the way that combat works in M2TW, peasants are a useless unit. In real life would it be unreal to see say five peasants with pitch forks surround and kill a knight? I dont think so. However, that would never happen in the game. The only way they would possibly be effective would be too create large spawn numbers like a full stack.

    I am interested in beefing up capitals, economically and militarily. Their loss should be a huge deal. One idea I am tinkering with is having a royal guard unit available only to factions in their original capital ex. for the English in London, French in Paris, etc. Would it also be possible to create a garrison script that reinforced capitals better?
    Last edited by Awellesley; April 30, 2009 at 10:51 AM.

  2. #42

    Default Re: Suggestions for new content for RR/RC?

    Along the same lines, would it also be of any value to restrict settlements in some locations to a maximum size? For example only certain sites would be suitable to build a citadel or a huge city (eg Paris, London etc), whether due to geography, climate, local agricultural capacity or whatever. That would seriously increase the value of those key sites, and would prevent situations in the late game where pretty much every city is large or huge. Rozanov posted some good data way back in the thread that divided cities up in the late era into Level 1, 2 and 3 sizes, which would correspond nicely to City, Large City, Huge City etc.

  3. #43

    Default Re: Suggestions for new content for RR/RC?

    where is Burgudy and sweden

  4. #44

    Default Re: Suggestions for new content for RR/RC?

    If you implement a garrison script it would be mucho appreciated if it's optional. CAI is getting good enough that IMO, and probably some others', that a garrison script isn't necessary.

  5. #45
    Suspended by Request
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    595

    Default Re: Suggestions for new content for RR/RC?

    Quote Originally Posted by Point Blank View Post
    Along the same lines, would it also be of any value to restrict settlements in some locations to a maximum size? For example only certain sites would be suitable to build a citadel or a huge city (eg Paris, London etc), whether due to geography, climate, local agricultural capacity or whatever. That would seriously increase the value of those key sites, and would prevent situations in the late game where pretty much every city is large or huge. Rozanov posted some good data way back in the thread that divided cities up in the late era into Level 1, 2 and 3 sizes, which would correspond nicely to City, Large City, Huge City etc.
    That would certainly make capitals economically important. I like it a lot. Another idea I had was putting wonders in all the original capitals that gave a money bonus...?

  6. #46

    Default Re: Suggestions for new content for RR/RC?

    Yes all capitals could be given the capability to expand to Citadel/Huge City, but some site out in the middle of a forest in Siberia, or a small island in the Med, or in the remote desert, should be restricted. Only needs 3 new hidden resources maybe named castle_or_city, fortress_or_large_city, citadel_or_huge_city, one of which could be assigned to each region to indicate the maximum settlement size there, or something like that.

    Wonders for each capital would be a nice way to add more faction flavour.

    I'm somewhat tempted to increase the distance-to-capital and religion penalties as well.
    Last edited by Point Blank; April 30, 2009 at 05:41 PM.

  7. #47
    Germanicu5's Avatar Will buy spare time...
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Not Zee Germany
    Posts
    2,109

    Default Re: Suggestions for new content for RR/RC?

    @PB Limiting city sizes/available walls was a great feature of metropolis/RTR mod for RTW, only several cities on map could build the epic (or whatever the name was) walls. That submod, along with naval mod rocked, actually I think we could steal a lot of ideas from there . I'm definitely for slowing down religious conversion/increasing time of religious unrest for settlements (this would slown down conquests)... introducing negative value for "enemy" religion building would be cool too (we'd need a script telling AI to destroy them as soon as it takes over a settlement). Kick some useless units as well.

    Regards
    SS 7.0 - The work continues

  8. #48
    Suspended by Request
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    595

    Default Re: Suggestions for new content for RR/RC?

    It would also be interesting if certain regions had more settlements capable of reaching that limit. Italy for example would be much more valuable if it had 4 settlements that could max out and the whole British Isles had one.
    Last edited by Awellesley; April 30, 2009 at 05:49 PM.

  9. #49

    Default Re: Suggestions for new content for RR/RC?

    PB: CC is already redoing Mongols and Russians, but he is not planning to add new units to Lithuania if you want to redo that roster.
    Also, do you want bugs posted in this thread or old one?
    Bugs:
    Mercenary Spearmen use old UI
    Mailed Foot Knights in unit card (the one after right clicking) for Aragon look Russian.
    Also, the old Genoa symbol is used more widely throughout the game than i previously said.
    Last edited by Asparagus; April 30, 2009 at 05:58 PM.

    Love NCAA football? Go here.

  10. #50
    Suspended by Request
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    595

    Default Re: Suggestions for new content for RR/RC?

    Quote Originally Posted by Point Blank View Post
    Only needs 3 new hidden resources maybe named castle_or_city, fortress_or_large_city, citadel_or_huge_city, one of which could be assigned to each region to indicate the maximum settlement size there, or something like that.
    How messy would it be to make it available for only the origianl faction in those regions? Something like...(modified for simplicity of course)
    Huge City
    requires factions { england, } and hidden_resource london
    requires factions { france, } and hidden_resource paris
    requires factions { hre, } and hidden_resource frankfurt

    etc.

  11. #51
    Suspended by Request
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    595

    Default Re: Suggestions for new content for RR/RC?

    but he is not planning to add new units to TEutonic Knights
    T.O. was already redone in BFTB 1.0. I am not sure if any more changes need to or will be done.

  12. #52

    Default Re: Suggestions for new content for RR/RC?

    [ignore this post]
    Last edited by Asparagus; April 30, 2009 at 06:03 PM.

    Love NCAA football? Go here.

  13. #53

    Default Re: Suggestions for new content for RR/RC?

    T.O. was already redone in BFTB 1.0. I am not sure if any more changes need to or will be done
    Yah just forgot that T.O. uses much worse roster in Ruischi.

    Love NCAA football? Go here.

  14. #54

    Default Re: Suggestions for new content for RR/RC?

    Quote Originally Posted by Point Blank View Post
    Yes all capitals could be given the capability to expand to Citadel/Huge City, but some site out in the middle of a forest in Siberia, or a small island in the Med, or in the remote desert, should be restricted. Only needs 3 new hidden resources maybe named castle_or_city, fortress_or_large_city, citadel_or_huge_city, one of which could be assigned to each region to indicate the maximum settlement size there, or something like that.

    Wonders for each capital would be a nice way to add more faction flavour.

    I'm somewhat tempted to increase the distance-to-capital and religion penalties as well.
    Rather than capping the building can it be done via tweaking the growth rate for the province? I like the idea of very slow growing provinces but provinces that grow as fast as other but can't build the same buildings kinda sucks, it would feel too artificial. Also have to be careful the game doesn't become too Certain-faction-centric. ie all the big cities are where they historically were and some factions have to expand or die due to starting in historically low population centres. With this also is the fact a player can change a city to a castle and vice versa, I believe the Ai can't.

    Also changing religion conversion rates and the like, will the Ai handle it? I like the idea but if the Ai flounders then thats bad. Actually you could probably write a simple script to give the Ai a boost in this department, how that would affect the player I don't know.

    The garrison script could be done so that for a capital an army of feudal or chivalric knights and similar strength units magically appear, to make it very hard to capture a capital before you yourself can make those units. It would mean that capital you can't capture requires you to keep a spare army in what would otherwise be a safe zone of your territory.

  15. #55
    Navajo Joe's Avatar SS Forum Moderator
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    England
    Posts
    3,991

    Default Re: Suggestions for new content for RR/RC?

    PB,
    If you allow only capitals to become the largest settlements, the only problem I see, is what if human player switches capital? This means the original capital will be the largest settlement and the new one cannot. e.g If Norwayswitches from Oslo to Stauffen













    'Proud to be patronised by cedric37(My Father and My Guardian)

  16. #56
    spartan117's Avatar Ordinarius
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    700

    Default Re: Suggestions for new content for RR/RC?

    Quote Originally Posted by Navajo Joe View Post
    PB,
    If you allow only capitals to become the largest settlements, the only problem I see, is what if human player switches capital? This means the original capital will be the largest settlement and the new one cannot. e.g If Norwayswitches from Oslo to Stauffen
    His suggestion wasnt to have huge cities to be dependent on whether it is the capital or not. It is to have preselected settlements have a hidden resource. Then have that hidden resource tied to the different levels of the wall building. Since not every region will have the hidden resource, citadels or huge walls will not be able to be constructed irregardless of the population level.

    As for suggestions for a new additions to your mod. I think revamping the building tree is always an interesting idea. Not necessarily barracks and recruitment buildings although a revamp of them could allow for a possible better inclusion of AOR units.

    For aesthetic reasons new "skins" can be created for the new armor additions to your mod. Although this is very time consuming.

  17. #57
    Caesar Clivus's Avatar SS Forum Moderator
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    12,915

    Default Re: Suggestions for new content for RR/RC?

    RE: Limiting settlement growth: I am currently implementing such a system for the new Baltic campaign map, limiting a lot of settlements to just village or town level. I'll let you know how it turns out.

    RE: Teutonic Order units: Firebat's TO order roster in BftB is pretty damn solid. I'm currently reading a great book about the Teutonic Order and I think the only units that really need to be added to the TO's roster are some more local units. Gonna look at adding some for the next BftB.

    BftB2 UPDATED 22nd DECEMBER. Member of the Complete Byzantine Unit Roster team

  18. #58

    Default Re: Suggestions for new content for RR/RC?

    Quote Originally Posted by Caesar Clivus View Post
    RE: Limiting settlement growth: I am currently implementing such a system for the new Baltic campaign map, limiting a lot of settlements to just village or town level. I'll let you know how it turns out.
    I'd be interested in hearing how it goes. I'd expect if the growth continues but you don't get the +% to happiness buildings then issues could occur. Will it mean smaller towns having a larger police force to keep people happy?

  19. #59
    Caesar Clivus's Avatar SS Forum Moderator
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    12,915

    Default Re: Suggestions for new content for RR/RC?

    Quote Originally Posted by Pengo View Post
    I'd be interested in hearing how it goes. I'd expect if the growth continues but you don't get the +% to happiness buildings then issues could occur. Will it mean smaller towns having a larger police force to keep people happy?
    I'm interested to find out how it goes too . I haven't started testing yet as I am still setting up the map.

    BftB2 UPDATED 22nd DECEMBER. Member of the Complete Byzantine Unit Roster team

  20. #60
    Navajo Joe's Avatar SS Forum Moderator
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    England
    Posts
    3,991

    Default Re: Suggestions for new content for RR/RC?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rozanov View Post
    NJ - garrison scripts - militia for towns would include militia cavalry ? would make sense to have these.
    would also make sense to have proper castle units for castles (what I would suggest as as these are emergency recruitment they'd be unupgraded 0 XP units)
    (whereas militia would be already trained - we are replicating a "call-to-arms" of the populace there.)
    If we can stick to units that are currently available from barracks etc that would also make sense but also would help the AI as it could then replenish the units if they survive the siege.
    If you give towns castle units and vice versa they'll not be able to bring them back up to strength and the AI doesn't appear to move units from one type of settlement to the other to do so.


    peasants -for those who insist they have a unit or two for labour intensive tasks on the battlefield and for rebel uprisings.
    Rozanov,
    Agree with all of this, that is exactly the way I see it. What current unit could be used as Militia Cavarly in towns, the only unit I can think of his Merchant Cavarly, surely they are too heavy? Who else could be used?
    I see where you are coming from, basically its any chap with a horse, who can fight, but what unit? Perhaps replace peasants, with a Miltia Cavarly unit, more useful to everyone













    'Proud to be patronised by cedric37(My Father and My Guardian)

Page 3 of 82 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 28 53 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •